Skip to content

Advanced Search Results

Act1: ports act 1908 section 16 · Page 1 of about 485 results (0.102 seconds)

Pulse this search Log in to save a LexPulse alert for this search

AI Studio

AI Brief on every result

Start a 7-day free trial - 18-section briefs and case chat on any judgment in these results, plus Semantic Search on your next query.

May 14 2009

Villianur Iyarkkai Padukappu Maiyam Vs. Union of India (Uoi) and ors.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : May-14-2009

Subject : CivilCommercial

Acts : Major Ports Trust Act; Government of Union Territories Act, 1963 - Sections 18, 46 and 50; Business of the Government of Pondicherry Rules, 1963 - Rule 5 and 5(2); Indian Major Ports Act, 1908; Indian Ports Act, 1908 - Sections 3(9); Pondicherry (Administration) Act, 1962 - Sections 5; Pondicherry Administration Regulations Act, 1963 - Sections 3; Pondicherry (Laws) Regulation, 1963 - Regulations 2 and 6; Pondicherry (Alteration of name) Act, 2006 - Sections 4; Environment Protection Act; General Financial Rules, 1963; Supreme Court Orders, 1960 - Order 16; Supreme Court Rules, 1960 - Rule 4(1); Delegation of Financial Rules - Rule 21; Constitution of India - Articles 162, 239, 239A and 240

Reported in : JT2009(8)SC339; (2009)7SCC561; 2009(8)LC3627(SC); [2009] 9 SCR 225

ports can be undertaken by the respective State Government after formulating its own guidelines and modalities. The Indian Ports Act, 1908 permits the State Government to develop the minor ports. By virtue of power vested in the Parliament by … the Lt. Governor of Pondicherry to the detailed project report dated November 16, 2005 submitted by the respondent No. 11 and its partner M/s. Om … personal selection, is rejected.22.The contention that a conjoint reading of Article 239 and 239A of the Constitution and Sections 46, 50 of the Government of Union Territories Act read with Rule 5 of the Rules of Business

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 08 2006

Deputy Commissioner of Vs. Abg Heavy Industries Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-08-2006

Subject : Land Acquisition

801A. The assessee supported its submission by referring to the definition of "port" as given in the Indian Ports Act, 1908 according to which a "port" would include any part of the river or channel in which the said … has erred in: 1. directing the Assessing Officer to deduct a sum of Rs. 13,15,01,864/- being deduction Under Section 80IA by holding that the assessee has carried on the business of developing, maintaining and operating any infrastructure … all the five equipments was required to be completed on or before 16th June 1995. The said letter also contained terms and conditions regarding certification

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jul 27 2017

Mumbai Port Trust Vs. M/S. Shri Lakshmi Steels and Ors. Etc.

Court : Supreme Court of India

Decided on : Jul-27-2017

Subject : Land Acquisition

to the constitution and powers of any Port authority in a major port as defined in the Indian Ports Act, 1908.17. Shri Maninder Singh, learned Additional Solicitor General appearing for the Union of India submits that the High Court … in respect of the bills of entry dated 04.12.2015 and 11.12.2015 prayed that the duty be assessed under Section 18 of the Customs Act, 1962 (for short ‘1962 Act’) and the goods be released, so as to … the Major Port Trust Act and it was also submitted that Section 160(9) of the Customs Act, 1962 provides that nothing in the Customs Act

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

18-section briefs on any result in this list

Sep 08 2006

Dy. Cit Vs. Abg Heavy Industries Ltd.

Court : Income Tax Appellate Tribunal ITAT Mumbai

Decided on : Sep-08-2006

Subject : Land Acquisition

Reported in : (2008)303ITR328(Mum.)

80-1A. The assessee supported its submission by referring to the definition of "port" as given in the Indian Ports Act, 1908 according to which a "port" would include any part of the river or channel in which the said … has erred in: 1. directing the assessing officer to deduct a sum of Rs. 13,15,01,864 being deduction under Section 80-IA by holding that the assessee has carried on the business of developing, maintaining and operating any infrastructure … all the five equipments was required to be completed on or before 16-6-1995. The said letter also contained terms and conditions regarding certification by an

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 09 2014

M/S. Shreeji Shipping Vs. C.C.E. and S.T. Rajkot

Court : Customs Excise and Service Tax Appellate Tribunal CESTAT Ahmedabad

Decided on : Apr-09-2014

Subject : Service Tax

are concerned in this case is being rendered in a minor port to which the provisions of Indian Ports Act, 1908 and Gujarat Maritime Board Act, 1981 are applicable is also a distinction which is untenable as grant of … services and are liable to pay the differential service tax and demanded interest; imposed equivalent penalties under various sections of the Finance Act, 1994. 3. Ld. Counsel appearing on behalf of the appellant after taking us through … following cases: 1). Chawgule and Brothers Pvt. Ltd. - 2010 (18) STR 164, 2). H.K. Dave Ltd. - 2008 (12) STR 561, 3). S.S. Maritime

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 17 1989

i.T.C. Ltd. Vs. Board of Trustees for the Port of Calcutta

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-17-1989

Subject : Civil

Acts : Calcutta Port Act, 1890 - Sections 61A, 87, 110, 112, 112(1), 113, 113(1) and (2), 142;; Indian Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 3, 25, 151, 152 and 161;; Sea Customs Act, 1973 - Section 16;; Railways Act, 1890 - ; Limitation Act, 1908 - Sections 4 to 24, 29(2);; Limitation (Amendment) Act, 1963 - Section 15(2)

Reported in : AIR1990Cal129,1991(34)ECC40,1992(61)ELT607(Cal)

had to consider the question of the limitation under the old Limitation Act. S. 29(2) of the Limitation Act, 1908 provided that nothing in that Act shall affect S. 25 of the Contract Act, 1872. Sub-rule (2) of … (as she then was). The l.T.C. Ltd. filed a suit against the Board of the Trustees for the Port of Calcutta being suit No. 930 of 1967 under the following facts and circumstances :--2. On 9th Sept., … by the law of limitation. While considering the question of limitation, the section which calls for construction of the Calcutta Port Act are :-- S. … the plaintiff that byvarious letters dt.6th Dec. 1966, 8th Dec. 1966 and 16th Dec. 1966 the plaintiff requested not only the Port Trust authorities but

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Sep 14 1950

V.G. Row Vs. the State of Madras

Court : Chennai

Decided on : Sep-14-1950

Subject : Constitution

Acts : Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908 - Sections 1 and 15(2); Constitution of India - Articles 14, 19(1) and 19(4); Madras Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1950

Reported in : AIR1951Mad147; (1951)IMLJ628

Clause (k); Rubber Production and Marketing Act (XXIV [24] of 1947), Section 3 (1), Clause (v); the Indian Ports Act, 1908 (xv [15] of 1908), Section 3, Clause (8) ; Madras Act XIV [14] of 1947 Section 2, Clause … order of the State of Madras in G. O. No. Ms. 1517 Public General dated 10-3-1950 declaring under Section 16, Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1908, the People's Education Society as an unlawful assocn. The petnr. is the General

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Jun 09 2000

G.C. Nagaraju Vs. the Executive Engineer, P.W.D., Mysore Division, Mys ...

Court : Karnataka

Decided on : Jun-09-2000

Subject : ContractLimitation

Acts : Limitation Act, 1963 - Sections 3- Schedule - Articles 18 and 55; Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 80, Order 41, Rule 27; Madras Port Trust Act - Sections 110; Constitution of India - Article 136, 141; Limitation (Amendment) Act, 1908 - Schedule - Article 115, 120; Contract Act, 1872 - Sections 73

Reported in : ILR2000KAR5033; 2001(1)KarLJ71

v Sirajuddin) in similar set of circumstances held that word 'compensation' used in Article 115 of the Limitation Act, 1908 has the same meaning as it has under Section 73 of the Contract Act and that, where the … defeat just claim of citizen came to be deprecated by the Supreme Court in a decision in Madras Port Trust v Hymanshu International by its Proprietor V. Venkatadri (dead) by L.Rs. 15. While taking me through the … 6. That, the appellant had received a copy of the letter dated 16-10-1985 from the respondent 1 addressed to the Assistant Executive Engineer, No. 3,

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Dec 02 1999

Mr. Kamla Kant Dube and Another Vs. M.V. Umang and Others

Court : Mumbai

Decided on : Dec-02-1999

Subject : Commercial

Acts : Code of Civil Procedure (CPC), 1908 - Sections 9-A, 20 and 120; Colonial Courts of Admiralty Act, 1890 - Sections 2(1), 3 and 7; Constitution of India - Articles 14, 21, 214, 215, 225, 226 and 372; States Reorganisation Act, 1956 - Sections 8, 49 and 52; Bombay Reorganisation Act, 1960 - Sections 3, 28, 30 and 37; Evidence Act, 1872 - Sections 58; Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 - Sections 1 and 2; Indian Ports Act, 1908; Colonial Courts of Admiralty (India) Act, 1891; Sea Act, 1925; Merchant Shipping Act, 1958 - Sections 3(15); Admiralty Court Act, 1861 - Sections 6; Criminal Law Amendment Act, 1952 - Sections 7(2)

Reported in : AIR2000Bom211; 2000(2)ALLMR48; 2000(2)BomCR556

Bombay Land Revenue Code along with English translation of relevant extract, marked Annexure C, the notification extending Indian Ports Act, 1908 to the Port of Kandla with effect from April 1, 1950 marked Annexure 'D' and the certificate by … claim as and by way of damages for the estate of the deceased is under the provisions of section 2 (proviso) of the Fatal Accidents Act, 1855 and compensation for the loss of dependency under provisions of … The plaintiffs are the parents of Mr. Arvind Dube who died on 16-8-1996 on board the 1st defendant vessel when she was lying at Kandla

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

Apr 09 1997

South India Shipping Corporation Ltd. Vs. the Board of Trustees for th ...

Court : Kolkata

Decided on : Apr-09-1997

Subject : Civil

Acts : Major Port Trusts Act, 1963 - Sections 65 and 116;; The Indian Ports Act, 1908 - Sections 31(1) and (2)

Reported in : (1999)2CALLT531(HC)

at the centre. It was submitted on behalf of the defendant, that under section 31(2) of (The) Indian Ports Act, 1908 the plaintiff was liable to pay the repairing costs of the coal-loader which had been damaged, despite the … to unfortunate combination of certain unusual factors put together for which no individual responsibility can be assigned.'6. Clause 16 of the By-Laws of The Port of Calcutta makes it mandatory that there shall be no movement within

Tag this Judgment! AI Brief & Ask

AI Brief (18 sections) + Semantic Search - 7 days free

  • ‹ Prev
  • Last »

AI Briefs · Semantic Search · Save & annotate judgments

Start your 7-day free trial